The Action for Good sub-session provides a follow-up forum to the IDA Portofino conference in May 2011.
We are reminded that over a billion people live without access to quality water supplies and adequate sanitation. The global desalination community has an opportunity to address these issues through a range of technological, knowledge and skills based and motivational instruments and the Corrado Sommavaria (in his opening comments) asks what the IDA can do in practice to be a more socially responsible organisation?
Emilio Gabbrielli describes the challenges. Access to clean water is essential for a dignified life. The cost of water must be appropriate to the equitable needs of people and, ideally, should reflect the full cost of the water, e.g. including the environmental costs of obtaining this water. One suspects that, historically, conventional sources of water have been charged at less than their full cost which may go some way to explaining why desalinated water – where the component costs may be readily audited – may be perceived to be the more expensive option. Charging for water is critical: a cost, however small, recognises that water has a value, encourages efficient use and provides an incentive to water management entrepreneurs (Tony Fane: ‘things given freely have no value perception’). Cost also encourages ownership and speakers stress that the long term sustainability of project interventions will only be fully realised where there is coincident training and education. Florien Bollen for example spoke of the opportunities for micro-finance initiatives and local empowerment (e.g. www.aquiva-foundation.de)
Rhys Anderson and Ralton Benn’s experience in providing water to remote Australian indigenous communities state that the keys to success are: honesty (be straight-up with the expectations), developing relationships, commitment from all partities involved, and innovation and continued improvements. More widely, and indicative of the good that the IDA/‘Action for Good’ can foster is transferability and transparency, as well as leverage of the desalination community players to recognise the opportunities for CSR.
Tony Fanes summed up many of these transferrable lessons from two particular slides in his presentation:
What went right? honesty, simple and easy to understand technology, successful knowledge transfer to the local partner and engagement priorities with local leaders, the disadvantaged and women.
What went wrong? unrest and corruption, reporting requirements, a lack of local support structure, and appropriate costing.
Recognition of the links between water supply and public health is critical. We are reminded by speakers in their examples, such as Herman Smit’s experience of installing small scale desalination in Informal Settlements in South Africa, of the tangible benefits of providing safe drinking water to people ‘at the bottom of the pyramid’. Volumes required need not be huge: the South African example can provide up to 300 litres per hour for an investment cost of up to $20K.
Greg Leslie highlighted the opportunities for recycling of desalination materials. I think I’ve already highlighted on this blog that the disposal to landfill of many of the waste products from desalination plants (such as RO filters) is staggering. We are told that many of these products may have come to the end of their manufacturer warranties and/or performance envelopes but still have useful and valuable application. Harnessing this potential of these products for second life operation has been demonstrated to bring huge benefits, e.g. for disaster and humanitarian relief (terrific examples were illustrated, including Australia Aid International / www.skyjuice.com.au).
No comments:
Post a Comment